ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
Non-invasive prediction of preeclampsia using the maternal plasma cell-free DNA profile and clinical risk factors.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine Learning Prediction Models for Preeclampsia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Cell-free DNA fragmentomics for preeclampsia risk assessment.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Cell-Based and Cell-Free Non-Invasive Prenatal Analysis of Preeclampsia: An Updated Review of Liquid Biopsy.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- BPX-Net: biomarker-preserved explainable networks for disease diagnosis and prognosis.BioData mining · 2026Article
- Early-Onset Versus Late-Onset Preeclampsia in Bogotá, Colombia: Differential Risk Factor Identification and Evaluation Using Traditional Statistics and Machine Learning.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Advances in cfDNA research for pregnancy-related diseases.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
33 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Preeclampsia (PE) is a pregnancy complication defined by new onset hypertension and proteinuria or other maternal organ damage after 20 weeks of gestation. Although non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been widely used to detect fetal chromosomal abnormalities during pregnancy, its performance in combination with maternal risk factors to screen for PE has not been extensively validated. Our aim was to develop and validate classifiers that predict early- or late-onset PE using the maternal plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) profile and clinical risk factors. Methods: We retrospectively collected and analyzed NIPT data of 2,727 pregnant women aged 24-45 years from four hospitals in China, which had previously been used to screen for fetal aneuploidy at 12 + 0 ~ 22 + 6 weeks of gestation. According to the diagnostic criteria for PE and the time of diagnosis (34 weeks of gestation), a total of 143 early-, 580 late-onset PE samples and 2,004 healthy controls were included. The wilcoxon rank sum test was used to identify the cfDNA profile for PE prediction. The Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used to compare categorical and continuous variables of clinical risk factors between PE samples and healthy controls, respectively. Machine learning methods were performed to develop and validate PE classifiers based on the cfDNA profile and clinical risk factors. Results: By using NIPT data to analyze cfDNA coverages in promoter regions, we found the cfDNA profile, which was differential cfDNA coverages in gene promoter regions between PE and healthy controls, could be used to predict early- and late-onset PE. Maternal age, body mass index, parity, past medical histories and method of conception were significantly differential between PE and healthy pregnant women. With a false positive rate of 10%, the classifiers based on the combination of the cfDNA profile and clinical risk factors predicted early- and late-onset PE in four datasets with an average accuracy of 89 and 80% and an average sensitivity of 63 and 48%, respectively. Conclusion: Incorporating cfDNA profiles in classifiers might reduce performance variations in PE models based only on clinical risk factors, potentially expanding the application of NIPT in PE screening in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.